Please read here on how to use images on RoyalDish. - Please read the RoyalDish message on board purpose and rules.
Images containing full nudity or sexual activities are strongly forbidden on RoyalDish.


Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: William, Kate & Animals  (Read 24582 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
PeDe
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5734

Offline Offline

Germany Germany

Posts: 32448





Ignore
« on: September 18, 2013, 06:01:54 PM »

a new thread to collect all upcoming information - JUST LIKE EFFING THIS ONE  Ranting Real mad Ranting Ranting


Two guard dogs that protected Prince William on RAF duty are destroyed days after he quits because they couldn't be redeployed or re-homed.


Belgium shepherd Brus, pictured right, and German shepherd Blade
were destroyed on Friday just a few days after he left the service



Much loved: Belgian Shepherd Brus, aged seven and a half,
had 'come to the end of his work life'


The Ministry of Defence said Brus, aged seven and a half, ‘had come to the end of his work life’ while Blade, nine and a half, could not be reassigned to other duties due to ‘a record of veterinary and behavioural issues’.

 Blink Blink Blink


The Duke of Cambridge finished his last shift at the RAF Valley in Anglesey last Tuesday.


It is believed that the two dogs were put down on Friday – but last night the MoD said the timing was ‘entirely coincidental’.  Snare
 
A spokesman stressed that the prince did not work with the dogs, which were used to provide extra security at the base.
 
‘The department’s policy is to re-home all military working dogs at the end of their  service life wherever practicable,’ he said.

‘Regrettably, however, there are occasions when they have to be put down.

'This action is only ever taken as a last resort. Unfortunately in this case the dogs were unsuitable for re-homing or alternative  duties and so sadly, for the animal’s welfare, they had to be put down.’

An RAF source said: ‘To be clear they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs, not sole protection for Prince William. The timing of their sad demise is purely coincidental.


'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers, who had an extremely strong bond with them.

^^^^^^
‘Sadly these dogs had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues which meant that they could not be reassigned to other duties and they were too aggressive to be kept at home.’ A spokesman for the prince declined to comment.


how does this make sense?


My first German Shepherd went through rigorous police training (but was not a service dog) and had lived as a guard dog for 5 years before we got him. Unless they were not treated right....they shouldn't be any behavioural issues.

either 'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers ...... OR ..... had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues


This is making me so fucking angry  Ranting
« Last Edit: September 18, 2013, 06:08:28 PM by PeDe » Logged

Mille

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 963

Offline Offline

Denmark Denmark

Posts: 3438


Meary at the beach




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2013, 06:07:39 PM »

I agree completely Peeds...It sounds really strange. And sad Sad
Logged

"She isn´t wearing ANYTHING", said a young child

The empress shuddered, for she knew that they were right, but she thought, "The procession must go on!" She carried herself even more proudly, and the chamberlains walked along behind carrying the train that wasn't there.

H.C. Andersen
zinzen

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 836

Offline Offline

Belgium Belgium

Posts: 3725





Ignore
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2013, 06:25:09 PM »

You mean that they were killed?Huh?Huh?Huh?
Logged

In reality, hope is the worst of all evils, it prolongs the torments of man. F.Nietzche
leatherface

Huge Member
********

Reputation: 720

Online Online

Nigeria Nigeria

Posts: 2570





Ignore
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2013, 06:30:54 PM »

why coukdn't they be adopted out?
Logged
fogdancer
Banned
Banned
Big Member
*******

Reputation: 316

Offline Offline

Brazil Brazil

Posts: 1851


An explosive mix of blonde and ginger with blue ey




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: September 18, 2013, 07:00:04 PM »

a new thread to collect all upcoming information - JUST LIKE EFFING THIS ONE  Ranting Real mad Ranting Ranting


Two guard dogs that protected Prince William on RAF duty are destroyed days after he quits because they couldn't be redeployed or re-homed.


Belgium shepherd Brus, pictured right, and German shepherd Blade
were destroyed on Friday just a few days after he left the service



Much loved: Belgian Shepherd Brus, aged seven and a half,
had 'come to the end of his work life'


The Ministry of Defence said Brus, aged seven and a half, ‘had come to the end of his work life’ while Blade, nine and a half, could not be reassigned to other duties due to ‘a record of veterinary and behavioural issues’.

 Blink Blink Blink


The Duke of Cambridge finished his last shift at the RAF Valley in Anglesey last Tuesday.


It is believed that the two dogs were put down on Friday – but last night the MoD said the timing was ‘entirely coincidental’.  Snare
 
A spokesman stressed that the prince did not work with the dogs, which were used to provide extra security at the base.
 
‘The department’s policy is to re-home all military working dogs at the end of their  service life wherever practicable,’ he said.

‘Regrettably, however, there are occasions when they have to be put down.

'This action is only ever taken as a last resort. Unfortunately in this case the dogs were unsuitable for re-homing or alternative  duties and so sadly, for the animal’s welfare, they had to be put down.’

An RAF source said: ‘To be clear they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs, not sole protection for Prince William. The timing of their sad demise is purely coincidental.


'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers, who had an extremely strong bond with them.

^^^^^^
‘Sadly these dogs had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues which meant that they could not be reassigned to other duties and they were too aggressive to be kept at home.’ A spokesman for the prince declined to comment.


how does this make sense?


My first German Shepherd went through rigorous police training (but was not a service dog) and had lived as a guard dog for 5 years before we got him. Unless they were not treated right....they shouldn't be any behavioural issues.

either 'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers ...... OR ..... had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues


This is making me so fucking angry  Ranting

PeDe usually on animals retirement,the person who trained  them adopt, to not make the dog suffer with the separation.

Anyways now Seabiscuit is on my "hate" list Ranting
Logged





In the lack of the words, be fluent in diamonds.
Countess of Cows

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 955

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 4631





Ignore
« Reply #5 on: September 18, 2013, 07:04:47 PM »

To be clear they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs, not sole protection for Prince William. The timing of their sad demise is purely coincidental.


I call BULLSH*T!!! OMG I'm so mad  Real mad this just makes me sick
Logged

"I would sooner have you hate me for telling you the truth than adore me for telling you lies." Pietro Aretino

I would rather be hated for something I am, than loved for something I am not. -Bob Marley
Suzy

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1472

Offline Offline

Posts: 3901





Ignore
« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2013, 10:01:19 PM »

why coukdn't they be adopted out?

It's no excuse to put the dogs down but these military patrol dogs are attack dogs who are used as weapon. You cannot re-home this kind of dog because of their extremely aggressive behaviour (they were trained that way from early on). It's very different from dogs trained for searching drugs or explosives or the usual police dogs/guard dogs who often live with their handler's family. Depending on their training, their triggers and their 'purpose' it's sometimes not even a dog you can take into a house or go down a busy street with for they are not used to that and react in a dangerous way. It takes a lot of training to get their once so useful aggressive behaviour in check and sometimes it's not even possible anymore. Then their only option is to spent the rest of their lives in a secure kennel.
But the military 'solution' seems to be to put them down. Just last year there were some articles about more than 800 military dogs that were put down in the last decade and most of them were frontline dogs/attack dogs who protected soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Logged
fairy

Most Exalted Member
*

Reputation: 3632

Offline Offline

Posts: 17891





Ignore
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2013, 10:13:27 PM »

There is an enormous bond between handler and dog. I cannot for the life of me believe that a dog handler devoted to his canine partner would agree to have his dog put down because it is of no use for the prince anymore.
Plus training these dogs is time consuming, expensive and not done easily, it would be hard to believe that they wouldn't be reassigned to a different task.
I can't stand William, but I sure hope that people around him, dog handlers and other military and whatnot aren't all such oomphsucking idiots who believe that William's  Dead smells like roses.
And for my inner peace, I will believe that those beloved animals really were at the end of their roads.
Logged

Mary's life motto:
"if I had the choice between world peace and a Prada handbag, I'd choose the latter one" Marian Keyes.
PeDe
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5734

Offline Offline

Germany Germany

Posts: 32448





Ignore
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2013, 10:15:45 PM »

why coukdn't they be adopted out?

It's no excuse to put the dogs down but these military patrol dogs are attack dogs who are used as weapon. You cannot re-home this kind of dog because of their extremely aggressive behaviour (they were trained that way from early on).

It's very different from dogs trained for searching drugs or explosives or the usual police dogs/guard dogs who often live with their handler's family. Depending on their training, their triggers and their 'purpose' it's sometimes not even a dog you can take into a house or go down a busy street with for they are not used to that and react in a dangerous way.

It takes a lot of training to get their once so useful aggressive behaviour in check and sometimes it's not even possible anymore. Then their only option is to spent the rest of their lives in a secure kennel.
But the military 'solution' seems to be to put them down. Just last year there were some articles about more than 800 military dogs that were put down in the last decade and most of them were frontline dogs/attack dogs who protected soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.




No not quiet!

Contemporary dogs in military roles, as well as police dogs are used as a Military Working Dog (MWD), or K-9. Their roles are varied though they tend to be more rarely used in front-line formations. For the United States for example 600 U.S. Military dogs were actively participating in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2011.

The most common breeds for these police-type operations have been the German Shepherd; but also in recent years there has been a shift to smaller dogs with keener senses of smell for detection work, and more resilient breeds such as the Belgian Malinois and Dutch Shepherd for patrolling and law enforcement.

All MWDs in use today are paired with a single individual after their training. This person is called a handler. While a handler usually won't stay with one dog for the length of either's career, usually a handler will stay partnered with a dog for at least a year, and sometimes much longer.

As a partner in everyday military police work, dogs have proven versatile and loyal officers. Police dogs can chase suspects, track them if they are hidden, and guard them when they are caught. They are trained to respond viciously if their handler is attacked, and otherwise not to react at all unless they are commanded to do so by their handler. Many police dogs are also trained in detection as well.

^^^^ and this is the ONLY trigger police or military dogs are allowed to have. The acute sence that their handler is physically attacked or they are commanded by their handler to attack.


There is NO other trigger!
Logged

Suzy

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 1472

Offline Offline

Posts: 3901





Ignore
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2013, 11:10:30 PM »

why coukdn't they be adopted out?

It's no excuse to put the dogs down but these military patrol dogs are attack dogs who are used as weapon. You cannot re-home this kind of dog because of their extremely aggressive behaviour (they were trained that way from early on).

It's very different from dogs trained for searching drugs or explosives or the usual police dogs/guard dogs who often live with their handler's family. Depending on their training, their triggers and their 'purpose' it's sometimes not even a dog you can take into a house or go down a busy street with for they are not used to that and react in a dangerous way.

It takes a lot of training to get their once so useful aggressive behaviour in check and sometimes it's not even possible anymore. Then their only option is to spent the rest of their lives in a secure kennel.
But the military 'solution' seems to be to put them down. Just last year there were some articles about more than 800 military dogs that were put down in the last decade and most of them were frontline dogs/attack dogs who protected soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.


No not quiet!

Contemporary dogs in military roles, as well as police dogs are used as a Military Working Dog (MWD), or K-9. Their roles are varied though they tend to be more rarely used in front-line formations. For the United States for example 600 U.S. Military dogs were actively participating in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2011.

The most common breeds for these police-type operations have been the German Shepherd; but also in recent years there has been a shift to smaller dogs with keener senses of smell for detection work, and more resilient breeds such as the Belgian Malinois and Dutch Shepherd for patrolling and law enforcement.

All MWDs in use today are paired with a single individual after their training. This person is called a handler. While a handler usually won't stay with one dog for the length of either's career, usually a handler will stay partnered with a dog for at least a year, and sometimes much longer.

As a partner in everyday military police work, dogs have proven versatile and loyal officers. Police dogs can chase suspects, track them if they are hidden, and guard them when they are caught. They are trained to respond viciously if their handler is attacked, and otherwise not to react at all unless they are commanded to do so by their handler. Many police dogs are also trained in detection as well.

^^^^ and this is the ONLY trigger police or military dogs are allowed to have. The acute sence that their handler is physically attacked or they are commanded by their handler to attack.


There is NO other trigger!


Attack dogs can be dogs who are trained not to guard their handler but to defend their post and attack everyone they see as intruder. These dogs don't necessarily have a handler in a way a police dog or a different kind of military dog has. If their work is e.g. guarding a military base they can run back and forth along a fence line and their trigger is every person that tries to get into the base. They are trained to hold and injure (and worse) what they think is an intruder without a command or a soldier standing nearby.
Logged
wisdomheaven

Humongous Member
**********

Reputation: 1446

Offline Offline

Posts: 5433


Probably don't know what timezone I am in.




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2013, 11:26:40 PM »

My family does a lot of work with training German Shepherds and this is standard procedure in the US military if the dog is considered to be unable to adjust to civilian life. As someone who loves dogs and especially GS's, its a harsh reality and one that I wish the military would find a better solution too.

It sounds like what happened is that these two dogs were general base guard dogs and because of health problems and age, going to be retired. When they were evaluated (the military, at least in the US and I expect in the UK as well, these dogs are highly valued and they try to find homes for them), and found that they couldn't do well in a new home/new family situation. I fail to see how William could have been at fault for this or in anyway even aware.

Logged
Kiki LaShrewd
Guest

« Reply #11 on: September 19, 2013, 12:33:32 AM »

As I said on the other thread this story makes Seabiscuit totally I redeemable in my mind even it wasn't directly his fault.

Luckily I just looked over and couldn't help but laugh when I saw my dog looking like this...


Logged
PeDe
Board Helper
Most Exalted Member
************

Reputation: 5734

Offline Offline

Germany Germany

Posts: 32448





Ignore
« Reply #12 on: September 19, 2013, 12:37:34 AM »

why coukdn't they be adopted out?

It's no excuse to put the dogs down but these military patrol dogs are attack dogs who are used as weapon. You cannot re-home this kind of dog because of their extremely aggressive behaviour (they were trained that way from early on).

It's very different from dogs trained for searching drugs or explosives or the usual police dogs/guard dogs who often live with their handler's family. Depending on their training, their triggers and their 'purpose' it's sometimes not even a dog you can take into a house or go down a busy street with for they are not used to that and react in a dangerous way.

It takes a lot of training to get their once so useful aggressive behaviour in check and sometimes it's not even possible anymore. Then their only option is to spent the rest of their lives in a secure kennel.
But the military 'solution' seems to be to put them down. Just last year there were some articles about more than 800 military dogs that were put down in the last decade and most of them were frontline dogs/attack dogs who protected soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq.


No not quiet!

Contemporary dogs in military roles, as well as police dogs are used as a Military Working Dog (MWD), or K-9. Their roles are varied though they tend to be more rarely used in front-line formations. For the United States for example 600 U.S. Military dogs were actively participating in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2011.

The most common breeds for these police-type operations have been the German Shepherd; but also in recent years there has been a shift to smaller dogs with keener senses of smell for detection work, and more resilient breeds such as the Belgian Malinois and Dutch Shepherd for patrolling and law enforcement.

All MWDs in use today are paired with a single individual after their training. This person is called a handler. While a handler usually won't stay with one dog for the length of either's career, usually a handler will stay partnered with a dog for at least a year, and sometimes much longer.

As a partner in everyday military police work, dogs have proven versatile and loyal officers. Police dogs can chase suspects, track them if they are hidden, and guard them when they are caught. They are trained to respond viciously if their handler is attacked, and otherwise not to react at all unless they are commanded to do so by their handler. Many police dogs are also trained in detection as well.

^^^^ and this is the ONLY trigger police or military dogs are allowed to have. The acute sence that their handler is physically attacked or they are commanded by their handler to attack.


There is NO other trigger!


Attack dogs can be dogs who are trained not to guard their handler but to defend their post and attack everyone they see as intruder. These dogs don't necessarily have a handler in a way a police dog or a different kind of military dog has. If their work is e.g. guarding a military base they can run back and forth along a fence line and their trigger is every person that tries to get into the base. They are trained to hold and injure (and worse) what they think is an intruder without a command or a soldier standing nearby.


I don't know where you get "Attack dogs" from?

From what they write they were they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs and they had handlers 'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers, who had an extremely strong bond with them.

That statement clearly describes that they were controlled by humans - their handlers- they were not chained to overhead line to run free along e.g. a military base fence.  A police dog, or military dog on patrol means he is always with his handler.

As I stated before, I had a police trained security dog (German Shepherd, named Chicco) and I had to go through a two week training course (daily) to learn the basics of how to handle him. The training stretched then twice a week for 1/2 a year. This dog did not move an inch without my approval. He did not growl at people, or bark unless I told him to. These dogs are willing to hold, injure, or even kill - but ONLY on command from their handlers - may that be an actual command or a cry for help.

If they do attack without command, the dog was not trained properly, or the breeder crossed genetic lines that shouldn't have been crossed.


German Military Dogs http://youtu.be/scHsG7_gq-w everything is on command. Nothing is done by the dog's decision. They train with/without muzzle, but on duty the muzzle comes off.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2013, 01:08:29 AM by PeDe » Logged

Hibou

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 816

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 4498





Ignore
« Reply #13 on: September 19, 2013, 01:00:16 AM »

a new thread to collect all upcoming information - JUST LIKE EFFING THIS ONE  Ranting Real mad Ranting Ranting


Two guard dogs that protected Prince William on RAF duty are destroyed days after he quits because they couldn't be redeployed or re-homed.


Belgium shepherd Brus, pictured right, and German shepherd Blade
were destroyed on Friday just a few days after he left the service



Much loved: Belgian Shepherd Brus, aged seven and a half,
had 'come to the end of his work life'


The Ministry of Defence said Brus, aged seven and a half, ‘had come to the end of his work life’ while Blade, nine and a half, could not be reassigned to other duties due to ‘a record of veterinary and behavioural issues’.

 Blink Blink Blink


The Duke of Cambridge finished his last shift at the RAF Valley in Anglesey last Tuesday.


It is believed that the two dogs were put down on Friday – but last night the MoD said the timing was ‘entirely coincidental’.  Snare
 
A spokesman stressed that the prince did not work with the dogs, which were used to provide extra security at the base.
 
‘The department’s policy is to re-home all military working dogs at the end of their  service life wherever practicable,’ he said.

‘Regrettably, however, there are occasions when they have to be put down.

'This action is only ever taken as a last resort. Unfortunately in this case the dogs were unsuitable for re-homing or alternative  duties and so sadly, for the animal’s welfare, they had to be put down.’

An RAF source said: ‘To be clear they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs, not sole protection for Prince William. The timing of their sad demise is purely coincidental.


'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers, who had an extremely strong bond with them.

^^^^^^
‘Sadly these dogs had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues which meant that they could not be reassigned to other duties and they were too aggressive to be kept at home.’ A spokesman for the prince declined to comment.


how does this make sense?


My first German Shepherd went through rigorous police training (but was not a service dog) and had lived as a guard dog for 5 years before we got him. Unless they were not treated right....they shouldn't be any behavioural issues.

either 'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers ...... OR ..... had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues


This is making me so fucking angry  Ranting
Logged
Hibou

Gigantic Member
*********

Reputation: 816

Offline Offline

United States United States

Posts: 4498





Ignore
« Reply #14 on: September 19, 2013, 01:07:18 AM »

a new thread to collect all upcoming information - JUST LIKE EFFING THIS ONE  Ranting Real mad Ranting Ranting


Two guard dogs that protected Prince William on RAF duty are destroyed days after he quits because they couldn't be redeployed or re-homed.


Belgium shepherd Brus, pictured right, and German shepherd Blade
were destroyed on Friday just a few days after he left the service



Much loved: Belgian Shepherd Brus, aged seven and a half,
had 'come to the end of his work life'


The Ministry of Defence said Brus, aged seven and a half, ‘had come to the end of his work life’ while Blade, nine and a half, could not be reassigned to other duties due to ‘a record of veterinary and behavioural issues’.

 Blink Blink Blink


The Duke of Cambridge finished his last shift at the RAF Valley in Anglesey last Tuesday.


It is believed that the two dogs were put down on Friday – but last night the MoD said the timing was ‘entirely coincidental’.  Snare
 
A spokesman stressed that the prince did not work with the dogs, which were used to provide extra security at the base.
 
‘The department’s policy is to re-home all military working dogs at the end of their  service life wherever practicable,’ he said.

‘Regrettably, however, there are occasions when they have to be put down.

'This action is only ever taken as a last resort. Unfortunately in this case the dogs were unsuitable for re-homing or alternative  duties and so sadly, for the animal’s welfare, they had to be put down.’

An RAF source said: ‘To be clear they were RAF Valley security patrol dogs, not sole protection for Prince William. The timing of their sad demise is purely coincidental.


'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers, who had an extremely strong bond with them.

^^^^^^
‘Sadly these dogs had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues which meant that they could not be reassigned to other duties and they were too aggressive to be kept at home.’ A spokesman for the prince declined to comment.


how does this make sense?


My first German Shepherd went through rigorous police training (but was not a service dog) and had lived as a guard dog for 5 years before we got him. Unless they were not treated right....they shouldn't be any behavioural issues.

either 'These dogs had played an invaluable role offering security to our personnel over many years and were much loved by their handlers ...... OR ..... had a record of veterinary and behavioural issues


This is making me so fucking angry  Ranting

A 9 and 1/2 year old dog could have medical issues, that's possible. The behavioral part is odd. Most dogs that are used as security, especially the military usually stay with their handlers and thus should be re-homed to that family or a family that is used to working with these special dogs. Most dogs with that level of training only attack on command. As one of my family's trainers put it, a dog that is trained for security or special purpose has the human equivalent of a PhD. A dog with lesser training might be deemed unreliable. I don't think they were there just for William but I do find the fact that they were put down and not given a chance to be re-homed hypocritical for a country that finds fox-hunting criminal yet they tolerate destroying man's best friend. I don't mean to offend the British dishers here, but it is irksome that this happened. JMO
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to: